WOW. AOL homepage covers "Loose Change"

[burythehatchet]

Although with an obvious attempt to discredit the hypothesis contained therein. There's also a poll that we should do.

Conspiracy Film Rewrites Sept. 11

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060428074909990003&ncid=NWS00010000000001

"Oh yeah, absolutely. On the day it happened, I thought it was the government that did it," she said.

Taub is promoting one of the latest presentations of revisionist theories on the 2001 attacks by al-Qaeda terrorists, a film that says, among other things, that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile fired by the military as an excuse to go to war.

Called Loose Change, it is being downloaded from the Internet and shown in small screenings here and overseas. It is not alone in the genre, and it is not unusual in American history either to offer simplistic explanations or demonize opponents. Presidents from Andrew Jackson to Lyndon Johnson were accused by their contemporaries of massive government conspiracies.



MODS: This is not intended to be a 9/11 thread (though it could easily slide into that bin)

[babylonsister]

1. CNN even mentioned it yesterday, though they were quick to

mention it's a result of conspiracy theorists. :eyes:

[burythehatchet]

3. Proud member of that club here.

They can call us what they want, if the message gets through to a few more zombies.

[valerief]

2. I know I thought the US govt did it on 9-11 once the second plane

hit. Bush wanted war. Bush got war. MIHOP all the way. History never changes. Just the players.

[liberal N proud]

4. And what happened on and to Flight 93 isn't a theory?

There has been on definitive proof of what actually happened on the plane not to mention what actually happened to the plane.

[GR]

5. Are You Referring To The Fact That Cell Phones Won't Work...

at that altitude?

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

11. What altitude

They were well below cruise altitude, somewhere b/w 6K and 10K. Plenty of DU'ers have had experiences using cell phones on corporate jets.

Check http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x84696 for a couple.

Also, most of the calls came in on the AirFones in the headrests. The Todd Beamer call came in on one of those phones, so it doesn't matter what altitude the plane was flying. These DO work at cruise altitude.

[Woody Box]

15. Nonsense

They were well below cruise altitude, somewhere b/w 6K and 10K.

This sentence alone shows that you don't know what you're talking about and so disqualifies everything you have to say about UA 93.

The phone calls from UA 93 have been thorougly examined. Not by the 9/11 commission, as it should have been, but by Flight 93 expert, DU and team8plus member John Doe II:

Fortunately for us we have one passenger using his cell phone: Tom Burnett. His use of his cell phone is beyond dispute. Contrary to several phone calls at the end of the flight where we might take into consideration that the altitude was far below normal cruising altitude at least the first three calls of Burnett have been made at cruising altitude. In fact his second call must have happened at a moment when according to the Commission UA 93 reached an altitude of 40,700 feet. His second and his third calls lasted approximately 1’ 30’’ each. And he never got disconnected. In fact the connection was that good that Deena Burnett heard him talking to his neighbours.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=48029&mesg_id=48029

Case closed. Burnett called his wife at least two times from 35k altitude or more. With a cellphone. According to the official story.

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

16. Little gift for you from Wikipedia.org

STRAW MAN ARGUMENT

One can set up a straw man in the following ways:

Present the opponent's argument in weakened form, refute it, and pretend that the original has been refuted.
Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated.
Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
Some logic textbooks define the straw man fallacy only as a misrepresented argument. It is now common, however, to use the term to refer to all of these tactics. The straw-man technique is also used as a form of media manipulation.

However, carefully presenting and refuting a weakened form of an opponent's argument is not always itself a fallacy. Instead, it restricts the scope of the opponent's argument, either to where the argument is no longer relevant or as a step of a proof by exhaustion.

As a rhetorical term, "straw man" describes a point of view that was created in order to be easily defeated in argument; the creator of a "straw man" argument does not accurately reflect the best arguments of his or her opponents, but instead sidesteps or mischaracterizes them so as to make the opposing view appear weak or ridiculous.


What qualifies your so called experts?

Edward Felt: Cell phone. As he called from the restroom it must have been a cell phone. Beginning: 9:58, Length: 1’ 12’’ (according to reports from the emergency dispatcher and his supervisor).The call got disconnected.

Andrew Garcia: Most likely a cell phone. This assumption is based on the fact that the call got disconnected after Garcia said only one word. The name of his wife. The time of the call is unknown.

Also notice how your own example Burnett has SHORT CALLS, not lengthy conversation. Not to mention that one of the "facts" used is that no one contradicted that he was using a cell phone. Could his wife have imagnied seeing his name pop up? If you have a link to the transcripts I'd like to see them to see how she answers the phone? Was his wife in the habit of recording their conversations? When I call my wife and she sees my name pop up, she usually greets me other than with a standard hello. How were the transcripts that he used to judge the calls created?

How do most of these calls end? Look at the statements.."call got DISCONNECTED."

And finally, make an affirmtive statement, what was UA 93, a red herring flight that did not exist? be careful what you say, I worked with and knew one of the passengers on UA 93. Most definitely existed. I'll give you a hint who it is, the name actually appears on the list you pointed to.

[petgoat]

21. You should know that anecdotes from anonymous internet

posters have zero evidentiary value, and are thus damaging to your credibility.

If you provide your name and the name of your passenger and enough information to
verify your identity, your statement becomes of the nature of an affidavit, like
Scott Forbes's, but otherwise your anecdote only clutters up your post.

Anybody can claim "Hani Hanjour was my brother, so I know...."

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

22. Touche

Great point!

But on the other hand, I am not concerned about proving or convincing anyone else of anything. That WILL NOT happen for those that believe that Flight 93 was spirited away to some secret NASA hangar in Cleveland.

I am trying to find the poster's "theory of the crime" through an affirmative statement.

But you taught me a valuable lesson, one that I had criticized others for but was blind to in my own responses.

Thanks for that.

:toast:

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

10. What exactly

is the definitive proof you are looking for?

The hole in the ground?

I worked with someone on that flight and corresponded with him via telephone and email quite frequently at work. So don't tell me they didn't exist either and that UA 93 was made up.

Oh wait, that's right, they landed UA 93 in Cleveland and offloaded everyone to "process" them at that secret NASA hangar.

Yup, makes sense.

[GR]

6. The Article Says Steel Loses 50% Of It's Strength...Enough For A Failure

but doesn't explain the many other examples the film gives of buildings burning for hours and sometimes days without collapse...It also ignores the descriptions of multiple explosions heard by eye-witnessess.

The idea that the film is perfectly accurate is nonsense but the idea that it doesn't raise monumental questions about the Bush Administration is also nonsense...

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

7. I am delighted that Loose Change is emerging into mainstream, but

this article is an obvious attack on its credibility. Hopefully though, it will spark enough interest that people will look for it online to view. Searching for it is very easy.

[FrannyD]

8. Loose Change 2

Playing at the Grand LAke in Oakland on Tuesday.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

9. View Online Link

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/watch_loose_change_2_on_line.html

There are a bunch of other links too.

[Neecy]

12. You know who I'm sick of?

This woman:

"The only thing they (the filmmakers) seem to have gotten right about the Sept. 11 attacks is the date when they occurred," says Debra Burlingame, whose brother was the pilot of American Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon.

"They aren't truth-tellers looking to save the world," she says. "They're con artists hoping to sucker conspiracy-theory paranoids or anti-government malcontents into shelling out their hard-earned dollars."

She's that awful shill who campaigned for Bush - a real angry looking freep type. Of course, the article simply presents her as a 9/11 relative without mentioning what a partisan attack hack she is.

She was everywhere in 2004, including the Republican National Convention. Real impartial source to get a quote from.

[mirandapriestly]

13. She's sure playing by the government's propaganda rule book.

" My brother was one of thousands who perished on that day, and we'll never know what happened on that airplane," Debra Burlingame of Los Angeles told the Post. "But it's not very difficult to see that he had an active, up-close-and-personal, probably hand-to-hand confrontation with one or more knife-wielding terrorists.

"It was no different than if he were in combat. Not only is he a hero, I think he should get the Purple Heart."

She was also AGAINST the 911 commission.

...and...her brother was actually part of the pre 911 Pentagon "practice" scenario.

Something's odd.

[Neecy]

14. She was Rove's answer ----

...to the Jersey Girls. They pushed her out front and center whenever possible to attack whatever the 9/11 families wanted from the government. I wouldn't be surprised if he gave her a script, because I always heard her repeat the same phrases, word for word, whenever she was given airtime (which was often, VERY often).

She always had the same angry, sneering expression common to the freep breed. Yeah, she lost her brother, but she'd shout down people who had lost spouses or children. Just a really rude, nasty bitch.

[petgoat]

17. A report attributed to Barbara Honegger tells some bizarre

coincidences about Charles Burlingame.

"4) the main pilot of the 9-11 Pentagon plane, former Navy and then Navy Reservist pilot Charles Burlingame, had recently, in a Reserve assignment at the Pentagon, been part of a Task Force that drafted the Pentagon's emergency response plan on what to do in case a plane hit the building -- which his own plane then did. It is therefore very possible -- in fact extremely likely, if not certain -- that this 'task force' that Flight 77 pilot "Chick" Burlingame was part of was the Cheney counterterrorism preparedness task force, and that the Pentagon plane pilot, therefore, directly knew and even worked with/for Cheney. and

"5) Burlingame's 9-11 Pentagon plane not only hit the Pentagon that morning, it struck a Command and Control center for that morning's counterterrorism 'game' exercise, killing most, if not all, of the 'players'. We know this because Army personnel from Ft. Monmouth, New Jersey were on special duty assignment at the Pentagon that morning for an emergency response exercise and were killed when Burlingame's plane hit. Ft. Monmouth, New Jersey also happens to be the headquarters for White House/Presidential communications, including therefore probably also for Air Force One (this is discoverable) -- and recall the warning "Air Force One is next" and the 'secret code' which was called into the White House that morning which WH press secretary Ari Fleischer revealed as a means of explaining why Pres. Bush left Florida for a military base and did not return to the White House. This 'warning' was probably called into the White House, if true, by either the Ft. Monmouth White House communications headquarters and/or the Ft. Monmouth counterterrorism exercise 'game' players temporarily at the Pentagon that morning."


http://anderson.ath.cx:8000/911/pen08.html

[Old and In the Way]

18. What a way to tie up loose ends.

I still wonder about those Raytheon execs on 11...were they the remote control people who knew that the military had this technology capable of remote flying? With the exercise underway, were they on board to monitor the effectiveness of the technology?

[petgoat]

20. "were they on board to monitor the effectiveness of the technology?"

Or to silence them?

Or were they on board at all? Maybe they were killed or witness-protectioned and the
flight lists were padded with their names.

[pauldp]

19. Of course not one mention of building 7

or Silverstein's ridiculous back pedaling statement three years after
he just happens to mispeak incoherently while giving an interview and use the industry term for controlled demolition to supposedly describe what happened to the "firefighters" that weren't even there in a building whose collapse, shot from at least 4 angles, the mainstream media refuses to show but coincidentally looks exactly like a controlled demolition.

Yep no mention of that.

Just that "wacky Pentagon missle theory".